The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

Peregrine wrote:The Chinese – IMHO - are playing ONLY ONE GAME. Ultimate control of the Indian and Eastern Pacific Oceans.

Peregrine ji, IMO, the Chinese are playing only one game right now and that is control of Indo-China Sea.

China wants to dominate what it calls the 'First Island Chain', that is, the arc from Japan in the north to Philippines in the east to Taiwan in the south and Indonesia in the west.

They need to control the ICS mainly for three reasons. One, to be able to freely pursue a short, swift war to invade and occupy Taiwan if and when needed without other powers such as the US or alliances such as the Quad stopping it. If they can hold off for ten days, they will subsume Taiwan, it is their thinking. Two, of course, consume the riches of ICS. Three, establish hegemony as the Middle Kingdom.

But, for that, they have to secure the two flanks, the stretch from Africa to Melakka of the IOR and Western Pacific.

When Xi speaks of c.2035 for modernization of armed forces, my interpretation is that this is what he means, being capable of holding off other power(s) in ICS while PRC swiftly completes the task of integrating Taiwan with the Mainland.

As with every Chinese strategy, they hope to achieve multiple benefits in one stroke. They are therefore perfectly happy that, in this process, they are also stringing India with the pearls.

The first island chain has its purpose in Chinese military doctrine. The People's Republic of China views the first island chain as the area it must secure and disable from American bases, aircraft and aircraft-carrier groups, if in defending itself it must tactically unleash a pre-emptive attack against an enemy. The aim of the doctrine is to seal off the Yellow Sea, South China Sea and East China Sea inside an arc running from the Aleutians in the north to Borneo in the south.[3] According to reports by American think tanks CSBA and RAND, by 2020, China will be well on its way to having the means to achieve its first island chain policy.[4]

I think they're less concerned about the riches and more about having a secure bastion for their navy. Right now they're fenced in on all sides. Securing their flanks as far away as Africa and Western Pacific is stretching it a bit far. Even further is ringing India. They haven't as yet broken out of that box they're in Japan/S.Korea at one end and Vietnam at the other with Taiwan in between. They have NO friends there except for the islands they're creating in the middle of the ocean.

Japan said on Monday that a Chinese naval submarine spotted in waters off flashpoint islands in the East China Sea was one of its new type of nuclear-powered attack vessels.

Earlier, China said three of its “Coast Guard vessels conducted a patrol in waters off the Diaoyu Islands,” Beijing’s name for the contested isles called Senkaku in Japan. Japanese Navy protested last Thursday after it spotted Jiangkai II class frigate and an unidentified submarine in disputed waters.

their main problem is a unsolvable one of geology. the ONLY deep water outlet from the SCS called Luzon strait (2km deep) lies in between taiwan and philippines. the rest of it, including the gaps in between philipines, from philipines to kalimantan(indonesia)/sabah-sarawak(malaysia) and between kalimantana to indonesia,singapore and malaysia are all rather shallow and easy to monitor with even primitive technology

and their main SSBN/SSN den is locked within this rice bowl.

hence the flame and fury to try and drive everyone out and overtures to philipines , I expect USN has multiple sensors all over these cracks in the woodwork

if they can gain a deep water military port on the south coast of indonesia that would be the real coup. right now even a mouse crawls those gaps, a bell will ring in pearl harbour.

Yindu on other hand is sitting all over the edge of the deep end, and our subs can dive deep and run silent with no chokepoints or chowkidars

we need to ensure that indonesia, myanmar and thailand does not become PLAN bases, and these nations and cultures survive as viable, stable and good natured nations that they are. this will ensure PLAN is always inside that geologic trap.

yes they will soon have a base in gwader but there is nothing much we can do wrt TSP except continue to inflict pain on all fronts and hope they slide more into the abyss. population is past 200 mil, and desertification and water scarcity a good threat

note the seas near singapore, lombok and sunda strait are barely 100m deep. in sunlight a submarine might be visible easily and surely the submerged wake of a passing sub can be detected by surface sensors as well. a deep water passage from hainan to india is really long - they would need to circle around east of new guinea and australia then come to india if wanting to stay clear of chokepoints and shallow waters

hence they would need a submarine base in gwader to poke their nose in indian ocean.

The most dangerous thing about the PRC is that the chinis are the exact opposite of the porkis. Whereas the irrational TFTA sees themselves as a “warrior” race who get their heads beaten in repeatedly, the chinis are a pragmatic race of merchants and manufacturers that can’t fight and don’t.

Our problem is we look at the Lizard through lens influenced by the Pakis and concentrate on the military side of things.

It has impacted us negatively especially through our insistence on importing the best weapons in market here and now to deal with “imminent” chini military threat when the PLA hadn’t fought a war in five decades. And when its one-child policy had created a generation of spoiled little emperors that doesn’t want to fight and can’t stomach casualties — a RPG in Sudan sent an entire chini peacekeeping battalion into retreat.

The constant need to import phoren against this military “threat” had stunted our MIC which is the most important weapon against a mercantile Chini power that is predicated on trade and production which in turn is dependent on peace not war.

So while their power grows during peace-time from producing and selling more ships and aircraft and infrastructure in ever more advanced variants from a massive and growing MIC, we are spending more and more on firangi equipment while starving our own MIC of those very billions sent abroad.

If we wait for the chinis to start a war, we will wait forever because they encrouch in the gray zone with numbers and in ways always short of war. They maximize their gains during peace time.

With all of our imported hardware, it is time to seriously consider going on an offensive. We should have escalated during Doklam when they gave us a reason. But we stayed put and did nothing. If we continue doing so, we are liable to wake up in a world surrounded by chini roads, ports and ships.

Singha wrote:we need to ensure that indonesia, myanmar and thailand does not become PLAN bases, and these nations and cultures survive as viable, stable and good natured nations that they are. this will ensure PLAN is always inside that geologic trap.

yes they will soon have a base in gwader but there is nothing much we can do wrt TSP except continue to inflict pain on all fronts and hope they slide more into the abyss. population is past 200 mil, and desertification and water scarcity a good threat

we need to proactively lay SOSUS arrays on TSP coast.

Singha Ji :

The Chinese are already involved in Myanmar and Thailand - Pipelines, Natural Gas, Ports etc. in the former and Trade, Defence etc. with the later. As such it is only in Indonesia that the Chinese might not be able to get any additions to their String of Pearls.

In Indonesia, they have a problem due to China claiming the Natuna islands of Indonesia and the rich fishing grounds around the island. In July 2017, Indonesia announced that the seas around the Natuna island have been renamed as ‘North Natuna Sea’ thus sending a clear message of sovereignty to China.

@ShekharGupta44m44 minutes agoMoreThePrint exclusive in a few minutes: Chinese PLA occupies entire North Doklam now. Moved up to metres away from stand-off spot. Formidable new build-up. @rajfortyseven with imagery

not sure how this was missed but raj47 shows with imagery a ongoing project to divert much of the tsango 90' north to taklamakan desertand the additives being sprayed also explain the black colours seen in india maybe

locating all that huge infra a few 100 m away from the LOC is a attempt to overawe and cow down by sheer spectacle. militarily they will be flattened in 10 mins by our arty firing from concealed positions deep in the rear. its the usual cheen approach of trying to win a war by "showing scale" and "huge rallies" (hitler too held million person rallies with flaming torches and other rites).

so prepare for war, but no need to get cowed down. zero in every inch of that place with rockets and roast them all if they want a fight.

This has been discussed before in another thread but let me repeat what I had pointed out on that thread.

The fart starts with the heading

Images show China may be using a secret tunnel to divert Brahmaputra water into desert

followed by subheading

Latest satellite imagery shows the river Brahmaputra disappearing into a 900 m underground tunnel in China.

900 m underground tunnel to Taklamakan? Either he doesn't know that Taklamakan is more than 900 m from the dam site or he has deliberately chosen to spin facts to create a certain impression in the readers. This is the caliber of our reporters/analysts there days. Can one take any of his analysis at face value?

Still further ...

The available images show a new 200 m wide dam that seems to have completely blocked the water of the Brahmaputra. The entire river seems to be forced into two inlets of almost 50 m width each towards the west of the river. The water flow comes out after around 900 m downstream in two outlets very similar to the size and shape of the inlets.

Per the fart writer, around 900 m downstream the water flows out. So how and where is the water being diverted to taklamakan? By now it is clear that while the facts on the matter are clear to the reporter/analyst but he has deliberately twisted them to project a totally opposite picture than what the facts seem to suggest.

BTW, diversionary tunnels are a common feature in all such projects. Do read about the various Indian projects in the J&K and else where. Then there is something called as the head race tunnel. That too is a common feature in all Hydropower projects even on the plains. Mere appearance of tunnels don't mean much.

In this age of fake news every article/analysis one has to be approached with much caution. This Butt Bhat fellow's farts, etc were highly sensational even during the Doklam plateau crisis. Since then I have always approached his farts with extra caution.

Days after berating China for exhorting pressure on India along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), Army chief Gen Bipin Rawat on Wednesday said terms between Beijing and New Delhi have returned to the same level of conviviality as before the tense Doklam stand-off.

"I think the bonhomie (between India and China) has returned to what was prior to Doklam, so I don't visualize a very serious trouble, but then one has to be prepared for it always," Gen Rawat was quoted as saying by ANI at the Raisina Dialogue here.

Rawat's positive outlook on India-China ties are an abrupt U-turn from last week's combative remarks on the need to shift attention from the western border with Pakistan to the northern frontier given the growing assertiveness of Chinese troops.

The army chief's statement had earned the ire of Beijing, with foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang panning Rawat's comments as "unconstructive" and unhelpful in maintaining peace at the borders. Chinese state media upbraided New Delhi for being "diplomatically immature" and asked the Indian Army to "tone down (its) hawkish rhetoric".

In contrast, the army chief took a softer line today, observing that the number of People's Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers on the other side of the border at Doklam had decreased.

"As far as Doklam is concerned PLA soldiers are there in a part of the area, although not in numbers that we saw them in initially. They have carried out some infrastructure development which is mostly temporary in nature," he said.

However, the Indian army is still concentrating on the neighbourhood and is prepared to ensure the situation does not escalate beyond a point, said Gen Rawat.

"While troops (PLA) may have returned and infrastructure remains, it is anybody's guess whether they would come back there or is it because of the winters that they could not take their equipment, but we are also there, so in case they come, we will face them," he asserted.

At the same time, Gen Rawat said efforts to improve bilateral relations were on and the Border Personnel Meeting, suspended since the Doklam face-off, had once again resumed.

"But mechanisms that we have of defusing tensions between our two countries are working very well and after Doklam we've started our Border Personnel Meeting, we are meeting regularly, exchanges are taking place, communication between commanders at ground level is on," he said.

While troops (PLA) may have returned and infrastructure remains, it is anybody's guess whether they would come back there or is it because of the winters that they could not take their equipment, but we are also there, so in case they come, we will face them," he asserted.

^^^ so is all the infra that is there in raj47 pics a type of potemkin village ghost town meant for signaling ?

pankajs you mean the tunnels are to divert the water around the dam construction site ? I have actually been inside one such tunnel in class6 with by state elec board uncle at a project site (karbi langpi project), they are huge enough for tipper trucks to easily drive through....apart from the tunnel the dam site was protected by a earth cofferdam. one day the cofferdam collapsed and washed away a lot of equipment before being rebuilt again.

so it means cheen are constructing a "run of river" type hydro plant up there?

there is however vast plans to divert water from tibet if not this exact site....so there is NO ROOM to be sanguine or complacent over this and pooh pooh things

the Chinese government started building a tunnel in the centre of Yunnan province in August that will be more than 600km long, local media reported. Comprising more than 60 sections, each wide enough to accommodate two high-speed trains, it will pass through mountains several thousand metres above sea level in an area plagued by unstable geological conditions.

Researchers said building the Yunnan tunnel would be a “rehearsal” of the new technology, engineering methods and equipment needed for the Tibet-Xinjiang tunnel, which would divert the Yarlung Tsangpo River in southern Tibet to the Taklimakan Desert in Xinjiang. Downstream, in India, the river becomes the Brahmaputra, which joins the Ganges in Bangladesh.

While Lanba did not say how many long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft like the P-8I the Indian navy would ultimately require, his predecessors have said as many as 30.

The P-8I, which is India's variant of Boeing's P-8 Poseidon aircraft, has some of the most sophisticated anti-submarine-warfare technology available, including Raytheon and Telefonics systems that provide 360-degree radar coverage. The plane also has a magnetic anomaly detector, which searches for shifts in the earth's magnetic field created by a submarine's hull.

The aircraft can carry Harpoon anti-ship missiles, depth charges, Mk-54 torpedoes, and rockets. The Indian variant also has specific communications software and Identify Friend or Foe abilities, allowing it to interoperate with Indian naval and air force systems. They can also data-link with Indian submarines to share information about target vessels.

China has also expanded its infrastructure in the region, including a presence at ports in Djibouti, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

India has been tracking Chinese submarines entering the Indian Ocean since 2013, and a 2015 US Defense Department report confirmed that Chinese attack and missile submarines were operating there.

In mid-2016, Indian naval officials said they were sighting Chinese subs four times every three months on average.

New Delhi started deploying P-8I aircraft and spy drones to the islands in early 2016, with plans to develop enough infrastructure and maintenance capabilities there to support a division-level force of about 15,000 troops, a fighter squadron, and some major warships. Other reports suggest India is considering installing an "undersea wall" of sensors in the eastern Indian Ocean.

Growing activity in the Indian Ocean, as well as the ocean's centrality to global trade and India's own security, have led New Delhi to shift its focus to the country's 4,700-mile southern coastline, where security and energy infrastructure are concentrated.

"This is a tectonic shift in India's security calculus, that it has to protect its southern flank," Brahma Chellaney, a strategic-studies professor at the Center for Policy Research, told The New York Times in July 2017, around the time of the Malabar 2017 naval exercises between the US, India, and Japan.

The navy, citing concerns about China, has called for a third nuclear-powered carrier that incorporates US technology and is pushing ahead with plans to acquire such a carrier at an expected cost of nearly $25 billion.

The plan includes a component of 57 fighter aircraft, for which US F-18s and French Dassault Rafales are being considered. Aircraft acquisitions may push the price higher.

China already has a South-North Water Transfer project to pipe water from hubei to dry Beijing. Yangtze drains the province and 3 gorges dam on that river is in Hubei. But just how much water can they tap? The majority of brahmaputra water is after it crosses over into AP through rains. In Tibet, it isn't very big. Besides, the distance to the NW of china is massive and across multiple mountains.

IMO, this articulation by Subramanyam Swamy is important notwithstanding whether one agrees with it or not.

India and China can break fresh ground if Beijing re-works its relationship with Pakistan on terrorism, in tune with firm assurances from New Delhi regarding its ties with the United States, says senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader, Subramanian Swamy.

Dr. Swamy, who has concluded a visit to China, told The Hindu that there were two focal issues that came up during talks with his Chinese hosts. He said, India’s concerns on terrorism radiating from Pakistan had been firmly conveyed during his conversations. The Chinese side, on its part, highlighted its perception of India’s growing ties with the United States, within the framework of the Indo-Pacific quad grouping. Apart from India and the U.S., the quad includes Japan and Australia as partners.

Aired personal opinions

Dr. Swamy insisted that he had expressed his personal opinions during his dialogue with his Chinese interlocutors, and had not relayed India’s official stance.

“First thing I focused was that we have a terror problem with Pakistan. And you [China] have a friendly relationship with Pakistan,” Dr. Swamy said. {I am not sure if it is being misreported. China can have a friendly relationship with Pakistan just like every other country. That's not the issue. But, China is supporting Pakistani terrorism single-handedly in the UN both in the case of Hafiz Saeed & Masood Azhar and dismissing everytime with simply a wave of its hand. It then claims either that not enough evidence is presented or it should be addressed by both countries through talks.}

He added: “I raised this question that it is very difficult to explain to the people of India that we [India and China] should have friendly and warm relations when on the face of it they [China] are friendly to a country [Pakistan] that is bleeding us through terror attacks.”

Dr. Swamy pointed out that India did not have a partner for talks with Pakistan, which, controlled by its seven corps commanders, were not inclined for a dialogue.

“After I expressed my view about terror and its links with Pakistan, they [the Chinese side] said they should be solved by talks. I said please tell me whom I should talk to in Pakistan. The civilians don’t matter. The military is happy that the terrorists are bleeding us. [I also] explained that the army itself really consists of seven corps commanders who control Pakistan.”

"Pak Army = Jihadi army"

Dr. Swamy underscored that the Pakistani army was rapidly morphing into a “Jihadi army,” as its future top leadership — brigadiers and above —were committed to an extremist religious ideology. He stressed that in order to revive ties, India and China should open a high-level dialogue between their Foreign Ministers. These talks should link two issues: China’s response to India’s possible “drastic defensive strikes” on Pakistani terror camps in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK), and concrete assurances from India regarding the future of its ties with Washington.

“In my opinion the improvement of relations between India and China could kick-start only if we have two agendas. That meeting should be conducted not by officials, but perhaps at the level of Foreign Ministers — Sushma Swaraj from our side and Wang Yi from their side.”

He added: “They should speak about an understanding on two issues. One from our side on what is the level of commitment of China to Pakistan in case we decide to take more drastic action beyond surgical strikes?”

Exploring China’s role

“We have to explore their [China’s] involvement, if any if India takes defensive actions on a large scale against Pakistan to destroy all the centers of terrorism in parts that really belong to us in PoK. I think this should be explored,” Dr. Swamy said.

“But it is linked to their satisfaction that we are not going to be part of any US-led alliance, like the Indo-Pacific. I also told them that we are clear that India will never be a junior partner of the Americans,” he added.

Asked whether he had proposed a “deal” between India and China, based on each country realigning its ties with Pakistan and the U.S., he said: “ I would not use the word ‘deal’. I would say that a good India-China understanding would come it they are mutually beneficial for both parties. I would say that one clear mutual benefit is that of an implicit understanding that if we take a drastic defensive action for their [Pakistan’s] terrorist attacks on India, they [China] would not respond aggressively for this purpose.”

On India’s part, “We should give an implicit understanding that if any dispute [arose] between United States and China; we will not become a party. It is a bilateral issue [between China and the U.S.], which they should resolve by talks.”

India has “realised” that its future lies in Asia, said BJP general secretary Ram Madhav, making a distinction from the “American way” of conducting foreign policy, in comments seen as a rare departure from the government’s traditionally close ties with the U.S. and Western allies.

“The so-called ‘American Way’ will no longer be at work in the region. It is the play of the civilisations that will be at work. India has to make cultural and civilisational linkages an important part of its diplomacy,” said Mr. Madhav, seen as a key player and track-two negotiator in the NDA government’s foreign policy making structure.

Strategic shift

“[India] has to completely reorient its strategic mindset. Strategic shift is needed from Westward Ho to Eastward Thinking; from Land-based thinking to Ocean-centric thinking,” he added.

Mr. Madhav outlined “twelve realisations” about the Indo-Pacific region at the Ministry of External Affairs’ annual conference, the “Raisina Dialogue”, on Wednesday. He was participating in a high-powered panel that included U.S. Deputy Assistant for National Security to President Donald Trump Nadia Schadlow, and Ministers from Australia and Singapore, Christopher Pyne and Maliki Osman respectively.

Mr. Madhav said the “global power axis” had now moved from the Pacific-Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific with almost half of the world’s population, half the container traffic, 40% of off-shore oil reserves, and most of the world’s defence spending coming from the Asian region.

The BJP leader also called for support for India’s “proactive role in the region”, saying New Delhi would not be a “spectator” as China pushed its Belt and Road initiative forward. He called the project a “Neo-Marshall plan” in a veiled reference to the carving up of post-war Europe as akin to Chinese infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa.

NEW DELHI: India on Thursday morning test-fired its Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in its final operational configuration from the Abdul Kalam Island off the Odisha coast, taking another step forward toward its eventual induction into the Strategic Forces Command (SFC).

There was no immediate word on whether the first "user-trial" of the nuclear-capable Agni-V missile, which can even reach the northern-most parts of China with its strike range of over 5,000-km, had met all the parameters laid down for the test.

The Agni-V was last tested on December 26, 2016, which was then described as the fourth and final experimental test of the three-stage missile. The tri-Service SFC, established in 2003 to manage India's nuclear arsenal, will have to conduct a few more user-trials before the 50-tonne missile is produced in adequate numbers for induction.

While the 17-metre long Agni-V was tested in an "open configuration" in April 2012 and September 2013, the third and fourth tests in January 2015 and December 2016 saw it being fired from a hermetically sealed canister mounted on a Tatra launcher truck.

Apart from the shorter-range Prithvi and Dhanush missiles, the SFC has inducted the Agni-I, Agni-II and Agni-III missiles. While these missiles are mainly geared towards Pakistan, the Agni-IV and Agni-V are specifically meant for deterrence against China.

SSridhar wrote:Mr. Madhav outlined “twelve realisations” about the Indo-Pacific region at the Ministry of External Affairs’ annual conference, the “Raisina Dialogue”, on Wednesday. He was participating in a high-powered panel that included U.S. Deputy Assistant for National Security to President Donald Trump Nadia Schadlow, and Ministers from Australia and Singapore, Christopher Pyne and Maliki Osman respectively.

Mr. Madhav said the “global power axis” had now moved from the Pacific-Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific with almost half of the world’s population, half the container traffic, 40% of off-shore oil reserves, and most of the world’s defence spending coming from the Asian region.

The BJP leader also called for support for India’s “proactive role in the region”, saying New Delhi would not be a “spectator” as China pushed its Belt and Road initiative forward. He called the project a “Neo-Marshall plan” in a veiled reference to the carving up of post-war Europe as akin to Chinese infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa.

But, But, Mr. Madhav - the term indo-pacific was nowhere touted until the Americans started doing so. OBOR is a "road based" initiative, Its thrust is the CA regions, traditionally India's backyard. Until, 70 years back the Indian civilization had its areas of interest to span from Hormuz to Malacca and it should be both, not just the oceans. Even in the so called indo-pacific, the land routes are equally important. Also, why call it indo-pacific at all. Stick to the civilizational concepts that always existed and call it for what it is. Indo-China!!

On India’s part, “We should give an implicit understanding that if any dispute [arose] between United States and China; we will not become a party. It is a bilateral issue [between China and the U.S.], which they should resolve by talks.

If there is a issue b/w India & China, do we also expect US to remain quiet? Were we not expecting US support on the Doklam issue?

I am not in a favor of putting all our eggs on the american basket, but why should we give such a understanding? Will such a understanding stop Paki terror or Chinese financial and millitary aid to Pakland? Obviously not.

If there is an issue between US & China, we will take sides based on our national interest. Just like the Chinese did during the Cold war...

BEIJING: A mostly Muslim county in western China has banned children from attending religious events over a winter break, an education bureau said in a notice posted online, as authorities step up control of religious education.

School students in Linxia county in Gansu province, home to many members of the Muslim Hui ethnic minority, are prohibited from entering religious buildings over their break, a district education bureau said, according to the notification.Well! Well!! Well!!! The Chinese showcase Muslims i.e. the Muslim Hui ethnic minority wassupposed to be the most "Chinafied" Muslims in China!

Students must also not read scriptures in classes or in religious buildings, the bureau said, adding that all students and teachers should heed the notice and work to strengthen political ideology and propaganda.

Reuters was unable to independently verify the authenticity of the notice.

A man who answered the telephone at the Linxia education bureau hung up when Reuters asked about the notice. A woman at the district education bureau declined to comment on the document's authenticity.

Xi Wuyi, a Marxist scholar at the state-backed Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and an outspoken critic of rising Islamic influence in China, shared the picture and welcomed the apparent move by the authorities.

With the notice, the county was taking concrete action to keep religion and education separate and sticking strictly to education law, she said on the Weibo social media platform.

New regulations on religious affairs released in October last year, and due to take effect in February, aim to increase oversight of religious education, and provide for greater regulation of religious activities.

Last summer, a Sunday School ban was introduced in the southeastern city of Wenzhou, sometimes known as "China's Jerusalem" due to its large Christian population, but Christian parents found ways to teach their children about their religion regardless.

Chinese law officially grants religious freedom for all but regulations on education and protection of minors also say religion cannot be used to hinder state education or to "coerce" children to believe.

Authorities in troubled parts of China, such as the far western region of Xinjiang, home to the Turkic-speaking Uighur Muslim minority, ban children from attending religious events.

But religious communities elsewhere rarely face blanket restrictions.

Fear of Muslims influence has grown in China in recent years, sparked in part by violence in Xinjiang.

The Chinese-speaking Hui, who are culturally more similar to the Han Chinese majority than to Uighurs, have also come under scrutiny from some intellectuals who fear creeping Islamic influence on society.

ShauryaT wrote:OBOR is a "road based" initiative, Its thrust is the CA regions, traditionally India's backyard.

OBOR has two components, one a 'land route' and another, a 'maritime route'.

The 'land route' was announced by Xi Jinping at Kazakhastan (Sep. 2013) while the 'maritime route' was announced at Indonesia (Oct. 2013). The Maritime Silk Road (MSR) is a plan to replicate the Land Silk Road project for those countries that cannot be reached by road.

It was during the same Indonesia trip that Xi also spoke about the AIIB to help investments along the Silk Roads. So, BRI took shape in these two announcements at Kazakhastan & Indonesia.

The Chinese document of "Vision for Maritime Cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative," talks of ocean-based "blue economic passages" which will connect Asia with Africa, Oceania and Europe under the MSR. The China-Indian Ocean-Africa-Mediterranean Sea blue economic passage, will run westward via the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean. The China-Oceania-South Pacific passage will run southward via the South China Sea into the Pacific Ocean. The third maritime economic passage is also envisioned linking China with Europe via the Arctic Ocean.

In October, 2010, the Russian Naval Chief warned of China’s ambitions in the Arctic Region. China wanted to join the eight-member Arctic Council as a permanent observer member, a move that the dominant Russia was uncomfortable with. It was due to the pressure from Nordic countries (on whom China worked with blandishments) that Russia reluctantly agreed to induct China as an observer member in May 2013. Shipping through the Arctic lanes, known as the Northern Sea Routes (NSR), not only avoids the congested and vulnerable Malacca Straits but also reduces the distance by 4000 miles and travel time by 15 days. When one considers that 50% of China’s GDP is tied to sea trade, the NSR becomes very attractive, secure and significant. It therefore demands an ‘open-sea regime’ in which there is freedom of navigation, something it wants to deny in South and East China Seas.

In fact, India is targetted by China under MSR, not much under the 'land route'.

Under the pretext of expanding maritime activity and MSR, China plans to massively increase its naval power to unchallenged levels. While India backs the BCIM, it is opposed to CPEC and has largely remained silent on the Maritime Silk Road due to security concerns in the IOR.

We have to remember that China was never a great maritime player in its history, except for a very brief period in the 15th century when Zheng He forayed out. But, modern China has understood the essence of maritime power to dominate the world and its MSR is an excellent guise for its colonial ambitions, more important to it than the land route.

Stick to the civilizational concepts that always existed and call it for what it is. Indo-China!!

Indo-China is not civilizational term either. It was a term, Indo-Chine, coined by the French colonialists not more than a hundred and fifty years or so back.

Naval chiefs of Quadrilateral nations - India, US, Australia Japan - on Thursday called China "a disruptive power" as they pushed for a new regional security architecture to face up to Beijing's aggressive designs.

"China is a disruptive, transitional force in the Indo-Pacific," US Pacific Commander Admiral Harry Harris said on the concluding day of Raisina Dialogue as he shared the dais with Indian navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba, Australian navy Chief Vice Admiral Tim Barret and Admiral Katsutoshi Kawano, chief of staff, joint staff, Japan. For the first time, diplomatic representative from Indonesia was also present to dispel any impression that the 'Quad' was ganging up against China.

"We must be willing to take tough decisions in 2018 against unilateral ways to change the use of global commons with rule-based freedom of navigation," Harris said, his views finding echo in his counterparts from the other three countries of the 4-nation grouping.

Admiral Sunil Lanba said China's navy had made big changes to its deployment patterns in waters around India. "They have a base in Djibouti. They have developed a port in Hambantota (Sri Lanka) though we have been told there will be no (permanent) presence (of the Chinese navy) there," he said. China, he said, is "developing ports and infrastructure that are not viable". Japan's Admiral Katsutoshi Kawano was more forthright. "China's military power is becoming more powerful and is expanding. In the East and South China Seas, China has been ignoring international law. In order to deter Chinese provocations, India, the US, Australia and Japan have to cooperate with one another," he said.

Foreign secretary S Jaishankar though said China has been a "motivator and example" for India in some ways. "People think if China can do that why can't we. To some extent, China has opened up the international order allowing India to make its presence felt. Its rise has many facets to it," Jaishankar told the gathering, adding India would have to step up and play a better game.

"What we are seeing right now is not just the rise of a global power but a very different power. Also, whether that power would be a model to others is an open question," he said. In the current global system of uncertainty, India, he said, is part of the "solution". He said India had "committed around $25-30 billion in credits and grants in our extended neighbourhood, from East Africa to South East Asia".

India should be worried about China’s continued military build-up in Doklam, said Lobsang Sangay, president of the Central Tibetan Administration in India. Dr. Sangay made his observations on the Doklam issue while announcing the upcoming events to mark the 60th anniversary of the arrival of the Dalai Lama and Tibetans in India.

“India has to be cautious about China’s plans in Doklam. China has traditionally maintained that Tibet is the palm and the five fingers are Bhutan, Nepal, Arunachal [Pradesh], Ladakh and Sikkim. Therefore its actions in the Doklam region should be taken seriously,” Dr. Sangay said.

Dr. Sangay announced that the Tibetan community in India will hold a major inter-religious event in New Delhi to commemorate March 31, 1959 arrival of the Dalai Lama in India.

“We expect a representative of the Indian government to attend the event,” he said.

The Tibetan leader pointed out that Bhutan should also express concern about the Doklam situation. “Going to the U.N. is definitely one of the options for Bhutan,” he said.

BEIJING: China on Friday justified its massive construction activities in the Doklam area, describing it as "legitimate" and aimed at improving the lives of its troops and the people living on its own territory.

China's reaction came amid reports that it was building a huge military complex close to the site of the Doklam standoff with India.

Asked about reports citing satellite imagery of a Chinese military complex in the area, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said: "I have also noted the relevant report. I don't know who offered such kind of photos."

But at same time he said he did not have detailed information on it.

The reports raised concerns that the China may be preparing for another standoff with India.

Lu, however, said: "China's position on the Donglong (Doklam) area is quite clear. Donglong always belonged to China and always under China's effective jurisdiction. There is no dispute in this regard," he said asserting Chinese sovereignty over the area which is also claimed by Bhutan.

He said China is building infrastructure for its troops and the people living in the area.

IMO, this articulation by Subramanyam Swamy is important notwithstanding whether one agrees with it or not.

I am very, very surprised that Swamy is even talking at this level: trading an Indian strategic move (Quad) for a Chinese tactical goal.

IF China wants India to disengage from the Quad/US, then China needs to roll back her IOR strategy. India can provide security in this area for China, no need for China to engage in the IOR. Furthermore, who trusts China - but I guess that is for another thread?

Indian Army Chief's statements, in the past few days, counters Swamy.

Finally, it is funny that an expert, when asked on NPR, what are the accomplishments of the Trump admin on FP, he said: Indo-US relations. That even before US-Japan (which was second). Went on to add that Trump has really no other FP accomplishments (NATO, Australia, etc).

In fact I see the current Quad hierarchy as US-India, Japan, Australia, with India in the lead in the IOR. And, with Indian eco growth India can only be in a far better position to deal with China. Also, China is going down the ladder. Started with Panchsheel, then bellowed about non-alignment and when non of these things worked now is trying to rope in some Indian leaders to poison the atmosphere in India.

ShauryaT wrote:OBOR is a "road based" initiative, Its thrust is the CA regions, traditionally India's backyard.

OBOR has two components, one a 'land route' and another, a 'maritime route'.

Those are the "what" of it not the "why" of it - What if OBOR/MSR is not based on traditional (read Western) understanding of strategy?Its important to understand the Wei Qi of using scarce (perhaps not with Chinese surplus ) treasury on these non-performing investments.If a bank owns your house for a 100 years, who does it really own - you or your progeny?

SSridhar wrote:In fact, India is targetted by China under MSR, not much under the 'land route'.

Under the pretext of expanding maritime activity and MSR, China plans to massively increase its naval power to unchallenged levels. While India backs the BCIM, it is opposed to CPEC and has largely remained silent on the Maritime Silk Road due to security concerns in the IOR.

What does China expect to gain if it succeeds in dominating the IOR (while US is still in Diego Garcia, Taiwan, SKorea and Japan)?Just securing the SLOC and dominating the IOR for the sake of doing so seems like a tragic case of hyper-realism gone to Shangai! What if again the Wei Qi has not been understood merely applying Western strategy models?

SSridhar wrote:

ShauryaT wrote:Stick to the civilizational concepts that always existed and call it for what it is. Indo-China!!

Indo-China is not civilizational term either. It was a term, Indo-Chine, coined by the French colonialists not more than a hundred and fifty years or so back.

Call what - Indo-China or Indo-Chine? Can the underacinated come up with terms that are more meaningful? The Indian Ocean is a connector!If there is Indo-Pacific then is there also an Indo-Atlantic?

One has to read up the history of Manigramam, Ayyavole and Ainnurruva, etc. - these are not merely Chola merchant guilds that guided the destiny of The Indo-Pacific, but may have earlier origins in Pallava, Chalukya and other dynasties in South India. The sad part is no such articulation has occurred from Indian scholars on merchant guilds such as the Anjuvannam for example that had Jews, Christians, Muslims, South Indians all working together to keep the trade routes with China open and operating to South India's advantage. The security of the Indo-Pacific was historically and hopefully in the future the responsibility of the Jana-padas (today the States of the Indian Union) of India.

Merely considering hyper-realistic power games defined by Western frameworks will miss out not only on the Indian historic experience in the region, but also in what the Chinese are trying to avoid and prevent with the rise of India. Focusing on the Quad means a stronger empashsis on security and not enough has been done on the economic renascence in that part of the world. Just my two paisa as always.

Exiled Maldives Opposition leader Mohamed Nasheed on Monday accused China of seizing land in the politically-troubled Indian Ocean archipelago and undermining its sovereignty.

Mr. Nasheed said Chinese interests had leased at least 16 islets among the 1,192 scattered coral islands and were building ports and other infrastructure there.

The 50-year-old former President said the increased Chinese presence could threaten the Muslim-majority nation of 3,40,000 and the wider Indian Ocean region. During a visit to Colombo, where his Maldivian Democratic Party activists are based, Mr. Nasheed called the Chinese action a “land grab”.

“This is colonialism and we must not allow it. We want other countries [in the region] to join us and speak the same language [against Chinese expansion]. We are not against any country, not against direct foreign investment, but we are against relinquishing our sovereignty.”

Repaying debts

Mr. Nasheed said 80% of the Maldives’ foreign debt was owed to China and the nation could end up handing over more land and infrastructure as it may not be able to repay the loans. He was referring to Sri Lanka’s experience under former President Mahinda Rajapakse who borrowed heavily from China. The new government had to sell projects to repay debts.

Mr. Nasheed, who wants to contest this year’s Presidential election, said he would renegotiate contracts with China if successful. He said the current administration had entered agreements with China without making them public.

BEIJING: China’s violence-prone far western region of Xinjiang will build a “Great Wall” around its borders to prevent the infiltration of militants from outside the country, state media reported on Tuesday citing the regional governor.

Hundreds of people have been killed in Xinjiang in the past few years in violence between Uighurs, a mostly Muslim people who speak a Turkic language, and ethnic majority Han Chinese, especially in the heavily Uighur southern part of Xinjiang.

China blames the violence in Xinjiang on extremists and separatists, some of whom it says have links to groups outside the country.

Rights groups and Uighur exiles say it is more a product of Uighur frustration at Chinese controls on their culture and religion. China denies any repression.

Xinjiang governor Shohrat Zakir said Xinjiang would step up border measures to create a “Great Wall”, the official China Daily reported.

“We will try our best to leave no gaps or blind spots in social security management and ensure the key areas remain absolutely safe,” he said at the opening of the regional assembly’s annual session.

Technology along the border would be improved and roads and other infrastructure increased, Shohrat Zakir said.

“The overall situation was stable in 2017, which made people feel safer,” he said. “We won’t allow separatism to stage a comeback and will ensure religious extremism never rises again from the ashes and terrorist attacks are doomed to failure.”

The “Great Wall” comments were similar to those President Xi Jinping made last year during the annual session of the country’s parliament, where he told Xinjiang lawmakers of the need to build a “great wall of iron” to safeguard stability.

Xinjiang has been relatively quiet over the past year or so after a spate of incidents, which has coincided with a massive increase in security, including collecting DNA and other biometric data from the whole population.

BEIJING: China on Wednesday welcomed Prime Minister Narendra Modi's speech at Davos where he described protectionism as being "as dangerous as terrorism", and evinced interest in enhancing cooperation with India to strengthen the globalisation process.

Modi, the first Indian prime minister to address the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual summit in Davos in two decades, yesterday talked about grave concerns facing the world, including terrorism and climate change.

"Many countries are becoming inward focused and globalisation is shrinking and such tendencies can't be considered lesser risk than terrorism or climate change," he had said.

"I noticed that Prime Minister Modi made some remarks on protectionism and his remarks showed that globalisation is the trend of the times and serves the interests of all the countries including developing countries and the fight against protectionism and promoting globalisation," Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a media briefing in Beijing.

She also said China would like to work with India and other countries to strengthen globalisation process for the benefit of all countries

Her surprise comments followed official media here giving big play to Modi's speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos yesterday where he called protectionism "as dangerous as terrorism".

Some of the dailies like Global Times carried the photo of his address on the front pages.

One of the biggest beneficiaries of globalisation, China has emerged as the world's factory in the last three decades posting double-digit GDP growth rates for years while thriving on massive exports to all parts of the world.

China is also firmly opposed to 'America First' policy of US President Donald Trump which was the main theme of Chinese President Xi Jinping's Davos speech last year.

"China and India share a lot of common interests. China would like to enhance coordination and cooperation with all countries including India to steer the economic globalisation towards benefiting world economic growth and well-being of all countries," Hua said.

Answering a question that Modi's speech "echoed" last year's speech by Xi at the same forum where he made a pitch for globalisation, Hua said Xi called for moving globalisation to a more open, inclusive, universal, balanced and win-win direction.

Asked whether the common position of India and China in opposing protectionism could help improve strained bilateral ties, Hua said "Our position is clear. India is a big neighbour of China. As the two largest developing countries and as two close neighbours, of course we hope that we can maintain steady development of bilateral relations. It serves the interests of our two sides".

"We look forward to working with India to enhance our communication and our mutual trust, properly handle our differences and ensure sound and steady development of our bilateral ties. I believe this is the aspiration of the people of our countries," she said.

Look at the map. Vietnam is viscerally anti-China and so are, in varying degrees, the other ASEAN states on the South China Sea. Land-bound Laos and Cambodia on the littoral are the exceptions. Cambodia is of particular importance to Beijing because of its frontage on the Gulf of Siam (Thailand). Without access to this frontage on the South China Sea , the Chinese Navy a would have no friendly landfall anywhere in Southeast Asia in war time. It would make difficult sustained maritime operations by the Chinese Navy even in this sub-region — with Hainan as the nearest base. That’s why China has been so solicitous of the Cambodian strongman Hun Sen. Except now Hun Sen will stay on after the other regional leaders have departed to enjoy some special treatment — a State Visit just for him with all the pomp and ceremony Delhi can dial up to impress him. If the bait is half-way big and juicy enough he will bite because there’s almost palpable interest in Pnom-Penh to get out from under the Chinese tutelage. And if Cambodia is detached from China, Laos will come unstuck from China soon enough. Vientiane, like Pnom Penh, has played a canny game, balancing between the benefits of the ASEAN and its connection to the West and the offers of Chinese subsidies, investments and trade concessions that have kept his country above water.

It is significant that all the heads of state/government of the ASEAN agreed to be co-chief guests at the 2018 Republic Day celebrations, suggesting that there is now a collective consciousness among the ASEAN group about the perils of being in hock to China economically or being vulnerable, security-wise, to Beijing which plays with a heavy hand. India is avidly sought as the alternate power node that can also provide security and free up the policy options for all of them. It is an opportunity not to be missed. The likelihood, however, is that India will once again miss it. Because MEA’s delivery mechanism is faulty in the extreme — but that’s for another post!

What can Modi offer Hun Sen and, by extension, to Thongloun Sisoulith of Laos? Assistance to restore the Angkor Wat Temple complex is an ongoing Indian programme, but it is old school, encompassed by Modi’s rhetoric of India’s civilizational reachout to Southeast Asia, etc, and lacks the bite. This approach in the 21st Century, moreover, has severe limitations. What Hun Sen will appreciate are things like a programme to modernize the Cambodian railways and roadways, and to help build east-west telecommunications connectivity, all of which can be subsumed under the ‘Ganga-Mekong’ Plan envisaged during Vajpayee’s time. This will have to be done at India’s cost, and which grant-in aid will be a worthwhile investment. Pnom-Penh could be afforded an additional $5 billion credit line to import capital goods from India — which will boost the country’s manufacturing sector and open a new market for it, with the understanding that these goods will be moved to- Cambodia on Indian bottoms, thereby giving a fillip to Indian shipping companies. And India should undertake to re-equip the Cambodian armed services and to train their select officers and JCOs on a regular basis at Indian military institutions here.

What Modi should ask for in return is the kind of logistics agreement India recently signed with Singapore that allows pre-positioning of naval and military stores and the use of the Sihanoukville port on the Bay of Kampong Som by the Indian Navy — the only deep water port in Cambodia and, use of the airport in the port area for use by Indian Air Force Su-30 fighter squadrons. It will be a deal that Hun Sen might readily agree to because it will principally show India’strategic intent, and lend him some breathing space vis a vis Beijing. And it will be reassuring to other ASEAN states, especially to Laos to the north. China will probably respond with increased aid, credit, etc. but it won’t overcome the desire of the Cambodians and Laotians to escape Beijing’s suffocating embrace.

By thus making the first cut on the Chinese umbilical to Southeast Asia, Delhi will signal its determination to counter China at every step and to establish an enduring Indian presence in these parts. Will Modi do any of this? His record does not hint that he will because, he says, he so hates doing anything disruptive.